European Air Charter buy 5 BA B747-200's !!!
Guest
Posts: n/a
I know you will correct me if I err, Guv, but I think you'll find that LH use a ... yes, shock horror, SENIORITY LIST. 
This would mean that redundancies would not be based on fleet. Since most Classic pilots are of high seniority, there are unlikely to be too many of them floating around on the job market just yet, eh what?
This would mean that redundancies would not be based on fleet. Since most Classic pilots are of high seniority, there are unlikely to be too many of them floating around on the job market just yet, eh what?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know if there's a link but in the December edition of Pilot the registrations page shows that G-BDXP has been sold to Iceland. Are Air Atlanta looking to fill any gaps in the market next year? This is what they specialise in doing.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I know that you'll be shocked to hear this, tilii, but LH are offering redundancy packages to their staff. How many Classic people do you think will be saying to themselves, "Hmmmm, I can pocket X zillion DM and go over to the UK and fly 742s there!"
Guest
Posts: n/a
The Guvnor
You know as well as I do that there is a vast difference between being offered a redundancy package, which one may take or not as one pleases, and being involuntarily involved in 'the process of laying several thousand staff off'.
Yet another example of your being ever unwilling to stand corrected, Guv. Shame on you.
You know as well as I do that there is a vast difference between being offered a redundancy package, which one may take or not as one pleases, and being involuntarily involved in 'the process of laying several thousand staff off'.
Yet another example of your being ever unwilling to stand corrected, Guv. Shame on you.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regionalflyer - I think we know exactly where we stand, the only variable is the depth of the poo......
And no, I don't have anything better to do than play with PPRuNe these days.
[ 25 November 2001: Message edited by: luddite ]
And no, I don't have anything better to do than play with PPRuNe these days.
[ 25 November 2001: Message edited by: luddite ]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Oh dear, tilii. And there I was, thinking that you had stopped playing games - how foolish I was!
I do not know how LH plan to carry out their redundacy scheme but doubtless I can do that if you wish. What I'd assume is that it would be similar to the UK - ie natural attrition through retirement, then voluntary packages, and only then forced layoffs.
I have read through this page again and I can see nowhere any reference from you (or me) to forced layoffs. Why, then, do you bring this into the thread now?
Anyway, isn't this supposed to be about BA's 747s ... not LH's ones?
I do not know how LH plan to carry out their redundacy scheme but doubtless I can do that if you wish. What I'd assume is that it would be similar to the UK - ie natural attrition through retirement, then voluntary packages, and only then forced layoffs.
I have read through this page again and I can see nowhere any reference from you (or me) to forced layoffs. Why, then, do you bring this into the thread now?
Anyway, isn't this supposed to be about BA's 747s ... not LH's ones?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well here we go chaps the gen ! sold for £15
each by big rod and coverted into millions by
stewart john. crewed by ex-ba crews with a huge payoff. bob aylings missus does the catering and whole lot is run by freddie Laker from a bar in miami (ive been in aviation to long)
each by big rod and coverted into millions by
stewart john. crewed by ex-ba crews with a huge payoff. bob aylings missus does the catering and whole lot is run by freddie Laker from a bar in miami (ive been in aviation to long)
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...and the marketing done by Roy L., an old Sir Freddie friend and specialist....and there just "may" be L10's in the picture as well...stranger than fiction. All will be revealed in the new year.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Uk
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm, I'll take bets on the 747s being introduced for the Hajj flights, on the EAAC AOC but under another company name. I wouldn't be surprised if Mr Paul Stoddart makes a good profit. Good luck to him.
I guess the attraction of being a smaller operation allows rapid changes of direction in reaction to industry trends. Just a damn shame some of us were thrown clear of the boat as it was changing direction!!
I guess the attraction of being a smaller operation allows rapid changes of direction in reaction to industry trends. Just a damn shame some of us were thrown clear of the boat as it was changing direction!!
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just WHAT do BAC 1-11 pilots' know about the B747?...in todays' market, the "smaller" carriers MUST obtain type-rated experienced guys...otherwise the training budget would go off the clock...not a happy thought...give the smaller operator a break...at least they are...trying.
Join Date: Jul 1998
Location: Europe
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If this is correct I suppose the argument surrounding the legality of EAC making the BAC 1-11 crews redundant and hiring B747 crews would largely depend on their contracts of employment. It would seem immoral also if true. Has anyone any solid evidence that EAC plan to operate these classics, because to add to the AOC is not a 2-minute job. My sympathy to all those loosing their jobs.
Any B737 crews going?
Any B737 crews going?
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Valley Where the Thames Runs Softly
Age: 77
Posts: 556
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it legal for a building contractor to make 20 bricklayers redundant and hire ten carpenters rather than retrain the brickies?
I think it is...
I think it is...
Guest
Posts: n/a
The Guvnor
You say of me that:
Once again you are being a very naughty chap in trying to put words in my mouth that you know I have never uttered. I have never argued that it is a ‘God-given’ right, only a right by way of seniority list agreements. You would do well to remember that such ‘rights’ were hard won over many years of argument and negotiation. They have served our industry, and public safety, well. Most of us will not see such rights eroded, especially by a Johnny-Come-Lately wannabe airline entrepreneur.
Unwell_Raptor
Yes, the scenario you describe is indeed legal. However, it is not relevant with respect to the scenario posted here as to BAC-111 pilots being made redundant and B747 pilots then being hired. You see, a brickie is not a carpenter, but a pilot remains a pilot irrespective of the type he/she flies. You know as well as I do that bricklayers and carpenters serve an apprenticeship over several years, thus their trades are not interchangeable. To train a qualified (and ‘apprenticeship’ served) pilot to fly an alternative aircraft type is a trifling thing by comparison. It takes a matter of weeks. It may cost to do so, but there can be a greater cost in not doing so in some circumstances. I would argue that to retrain the BAC-111 crews on the B747 would be a wise investment if the intention is to operate the B747 for any length of time. And that may be the problem here in that there may be no long-term intention to operate the type. In such circumstances, it would be a sound commercial decision to make the BAC-111 crews redundant and hire in type-rated B747 crews for the short period of operation intended. I will go one step further and say that it would also be in the best long-term interests of those BAC-111 crews to take up employment elsewhere rather than retrain just to again be made redundant some short time in the future.
You say of me that:
According to him it's a God-given right under seniority rules that existing crews should be converted onto new types - regardless of expense.
Unwell_Raptor
Yes, the scenario you describe is indeed legal. However, it is not relevant with respect to the scenario posted here as to BAC-111 pilots being made redundant and B747 pilots then being hired. You see, a brickie is not a carpenter, but a pilot remains a pilot irrespective of the type he/she flies. You know as well as I do that bricklayers and carpenters serve an apprenticeship over several years, thus their trades are not interchangeable. To train a qualified (and ‘apprenticeship’ served) pilot to fly an alternative aircraft type is a trifling thing by comparison. It takes a matter of weeks. It may cost to do so, but there can be a greater cost in not doing so in some circumstances. I would argue that to retrain the BAC-111 crews on the B747 would be a wise investment if the intention is to operate the B747 for any length of time. And that may be the problem here in that there may be no long-term intention to operate the type. In such circumstances, it would be a sound commercial decision to make the BAC-111 crews redundant and hire in type-rated B747 crews for the short period of operation intended. I will go one step further and say that it would also be in the best long-term interests of those BAC-111 crews to take up employment elsewhere rather than retrain just to again be made redundant some short time in the future.